AGEOD Forums

1. Does anyone feel it is a little gamey to dig trenches with two or three divisions and then have a single unit-say militia or supply-maintain those trenches while the divisions that built them is sent off to battle elsewhere and then come back to benefit from the entrenchment level?

2. What is the highest Pwr division you have ever built? I have seen divisions get into the 620 range with a little rest. It seems like with 3 art, 1 cav, one ss, and the rest inf I get the highest Pwr number.

1. probably. but it's allowed. You can also build your next entrenchment line with one militia each, and all those divisions can fall back into it, ready to go. Even leaders can hold that entrenchment alive without troops. I wouldn't consider it too gamey if such matters were done to move troops out and other troops in during the same turn. But I don't worry about gamey too much.
2. sounds about right. I see 500s all the time in the tourney. Couple of elites or specialty units - <poof> you're over 600.

1. It can be a little gamey when you have a militia build trenches in places you've never had troops before and all of a sudden 50k troops are using them. But as for holding trenches, I say "nope" just because nature wouldn't reclaim the land that quickly.

2. Try adding some naval art into the division and see the huge numbers. I'm convinced I've staved off an attack or two buy putting 2 naval art and a militia unit together forming a +400 pwr division. Never tried making a total naval gun division before. I know each one is around ~220 power. Mmmm I feel a challenge coming on.

rattler01 wrote:1. It can be a little gamey when you have a militia build trenches in places you've never had troops before and all of a sudden 50k troops are using them. But as for holding trenches, I say "nope" just because nature wouldn't reclaim the land that quickly.

2. Try adding some naval art into the division and see the huge numbers. I'm convinced I've staved off an attack or two buy putting 2 naval art and a militia unit together forming a +400 pwr division. Never tried making a total naval gun division before. I know each one is around ~220 power. Mmmm I feel a challenge coming on.

In recent threads, it was posted and confirmed that the coastal artillery has no effect on land combat ... however .... in a recent battle report in the tourney one was listed as being involved in a land combat. So someone who tracks details can clear this up I hope? They're definitely not 220 though.

colonel hurst wrote:1. Does anyone feel it is a little gamey to dig trenches with two or three divisions and then have a single unit-say militia or supply-maintain those trenches while the divisions that built them is sent off to battle elsewhere and then come back to benefit from the entrenchment level?

In one of the most famous campaigns of the American Civil War, Joe Johnston had each of his next entrenchment lines dug before Sherman could push him further back toward Atlanta. So it is certainly not gamey.
The issue might be how early in the game these WWI style trenches can be built. Not until 1864 did these sophisticated entrenchments impact battle.
But this is surely historical.

Longshanks wrote:In recent threads, it was posted and confirmed that the coastal artillery has no effect on land combat ... however .... in a recent battle report in the tourney one was listed as being involved in a land combat. So someone who tracks details can clear this up I hope? They're definitely not 220 though.

I didn't mean to imply they effected battle. Just that they raise the pwr numbers in divisions. And sense there is no way to see the composition of a division, other than attacking it.

Good thoughts on the trenches, I do think they effect the game a little earlier than they should as well.

Durk wrote:In one of the most famous campaigns of the American Civil War, Joe Johnston had each of his next entrenchment lines dug before Sherman could push him further back toward Atlanta. So it is certainly not gamey.
The issue might be how early in the game these WWI style trenches can be built. Not until 1864 did these sophisticated entrenchments impact battle.
But this is surely historical.

Excellent point. JJ also did the same during the peninsula campaign.

Some history books attribute the Peninsula entrenchments to Magruder.

Shelby Foote left me with the impression that Johnston ordered them built and that Magruder's previous efforts were poor. Either way, there was digging, flooding, and mayhem going on, although none of the lines held for long once Lil Mac's big army got moving.

I am pretty sure Shelby Foote would agree that Magruder's entrenchments were more in the mind of Lil Mac than in reality. Magruder had the good sense to abandon his lines when McClellan had his big guns in place, plenty of time for Johnston to form lines.
JJ had great entrenchments in the Manassas area which helped encourage McClellan to try his peninsular experiment.
But do not forget the influence of Pinkerton's poor intelligence on McClellan's mind. He thought he was facing an army twice his size. To get around this 'monster' army at Bull Run, he outflanked it by getting caught up in Magruder's charades.
How solid were these entrenchments, Quaker Guns was the post mortem evaluation. Not so solid.

Most would agree that 'Prince John' probably deserved the "Deceiver" attribute in the game perhaps more than any other general on either side. On top of that, Confederate officers all seemed to have an extremely clear understanding of McClellan's mind-set: it certainly wasn't just Lee who figured him out. His trepidation and caution were notorious, and the dynamic can't be much more enhanced than McClellan faced by Magruder: Little Mac should be seeing double his own troop numbers, in a level 2 fort at all times.

Actually, the entrenchments were fairly good. The issues were the lack of men to place in them and the placement that was required by the terrain in locations. It's not the best area to try and fortify since it's very broken up. With what he had to work with, they were done quite well. Magruder was the subject of one of my papers in college. Even considering who he was facing, that job was well done.

Stephen W. Sears wrote a book on the campaign which contains information on the entrenchments/works, who built them and why they were abandoned by confederates. Good reading.

'To The Gates of Richmond, the Peninsula Campaign'